Home›Compare›Europe shortlist
Europe shortlist · source-first decision page

Open-Weight Models from European Union Providers

Compare open-weight models from EU providers while keeping provider origin separate from inference location, data residency, GDPR processing and AI Act roles.

Updated 1 Oct 20267 referenced modelsNo universal ranking
Direct answer

An EU provider flag is supply-chain metadata, not a data-residency or compliance guarantee. The current OWM registry’s EU-provider entries are primarily Mistral AI releases spanning compact Ministral models, coding and reasoning models, and larger multimodal systems. Any of these can still process data outside the EU if your deployment, logging, RAG, embedding or backup architecture sends it there.

01Provider origin
02Inference region
03Full data path
04Regulatory role

Shortlist snapshot

ModelArchitecture / sizeLicenseOWM hardware classProvider origin
Ministral 3 3B Instruct 2512Mistral AI3B-class · vision-language edge modelApache 2.0≤8B · consumer/localEU provider
Ministral 3 8B Instruct 2512Mistral AI8B-class · vision-language edge modelApache 2.0≤8B · consumer/localEU provider
Ministral 3 14B Instruct 2512Mistral AI14B-class · vision-language edge modelApache 2.09–16B · workstation/localEU provider
Devstral Small 2 24B Instruct 2512Mistral AI24B · coding agent modelApache 2.017–32B · high-memory workstationEU provider
Magistral Small 2506Mistral AI24B-class · reasoningApache 2.017–32B · high-memory workstationEU provider
Mistral Small 3.1 24B InstructMistral AI24B · multimodalApache 2.017–32B · high-memory workstationEU provider
Mistral Small 4 119B A6BMistral AI119B / 6.5B active · multimodal MoEApache 2.0Model-specific · large / specializedEU provider
Important: a shortlist is not a ranking. Eliminate incompatible models first, then benchmark the survivors on the exact workload.

What should drive the decision?

Provider country answers who publishes the model. Data residency answers where prompts, retrieved documents, embeddings, logs, telemetry and backups are actually processed or stored. Those are different questions.

Self-hosting downloaded weights on EU/EEA infrastructure can give an organization more control over the inference path, but it does not by itself establish GDPR compliance. Legal basis, processor relationships, security, retention, user rights and international transfers still require analysis.

The EU AI Act likewise depends on role and use context. OWM does not assign blanket compliance badges to a model because the same checkpoint can be used in very different systems.

Models to evaluate

Hardware and runtime reality

Weight-only estimates are a starting point. Add KV cache, runtime workspaces, multimodal components, batching and concurrency headroom. For local inference, validate the exact quantized artifact. For server inference, measure time to first token, throughput and peak memory at target concurrency.

Long context can make an otherwise comfortable model exceed the practical memory budget. Test the longest realistic prompt and generation, not only a short loading test.

License, provider origin and Europe

Review the exact checkpoint license and any separate usage terms. Provider origin is supply-chain metadata, not an inference-location claim. If EU/EEA residency matters, map inference, RAG, embeddings, logs, telemetry, backups and subprocessors.

Evaluation checklist

Task qualityRepresentative prompts and hard cases.
ReliabilityTool errors, malformed output and regressions.
Latency + throughputMeasure target concurrency.
Peak memoryUse realistic context lengths.
License fitExact checkpoint and distribution model.
Data pathInference, retrieval, logs and backups.

Primary sources and related references